Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Audit Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Auditors give Richfield an unmodified opinion; report flags asset‑tracking and posting issues
Summary
The independent auditors issued an unmodified opinion for FY2025 financial statements but identified internal‑control and state‑compliance findings, including an incomplete capital assets schedule, an omitted May 2025 meeting posting, and an untimely fraud risk assessment.
Quinlan Roberts, the independent auditor, presented Richfield City's audited financial statements for the year ended June 30, 2025, and read the audit opinion into the record: "In our opinion, the accompanying financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of Richfield City... in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in The United States Of America." The firm issued an unmodified (clean) opinion.
Key figures highlighted by the auditor include a total governmental funds ending fund balance of about $11,785,000, an increase of roughly $947,000 from the prior year, and approximately $7,450,000 (about 63% of the total) available for spending. The auditor noted an unassigned general fund balance around $3,000,000 (approximately 35% of general fund expenditures). Cash and short‑term investments were summarized as roughly $8,000,000 in demand deposits and $9,000,000 in PTIF, totaling about $17.2 million across funds.
The audit report included three notable findings the auditors classified as deficiencies: (1) the capital assets schedule is not fully maintained or reconciled (audit testing identified one land purchase that was not recorded, five vehicles recorded at incorrect cost values because trade‑ins were not properly disposed, and completed capital projects not moved from construction‑in‑progress to capital assets); (2) a required public meeting minute (May 2025) was not posted to the Utah public notice website within the statutory timeframe, prompting a compliance finding; and (3) the fiscal‑year 2025 fraud risk assessment was not completed and approved by the governing body within the fiscal year as required for state submission.
Auditors recommended the city implement a formal annual reconciliation process for capital assets, correct asset records for traded vehicles and completed projects, and adopt monitoring procedures to ensure minutes and fraud risk assessments are completed and posted as required. Several council members asked clarifying questions about fund balances, what "unassigned" means, and materiality thresholds.
A council member moved and another seconded a motion to accept the audited financial statements for the fiscal period ending 06/30/2025; the motion was recorded on the meeting agenda and placed for council action.
